Self Remembering

[Buddy]

...but how did I "know" EXACTLY where the injured crow was? That's what I call "Intuition"

It is just a working feeling center - the inductive cognitive loop I've been describing. It's a human birthright and this layer of cognition gets squelched in early childhood when most of us are coerced into ritualization. It's also squelched in addicts, no matter what the chemical they are addicted to, as long as it raises dopamine levels high enough to 'numb' part of the brain.

When the 'intuition' is correct, the sensitivity of your inner being has accurately decoded the info that is already in the environmental data; "noise" to addicts.

The way you describe it is also the way I experience it and I have also provided a few examples, in different contexts, in previous posts. Thanks for your contribution. :)


----------------------------
Edit: additions for clarity

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Laura has written about instinct/intuition elsewhere on the forum. E.g., http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=4441.msg30081#msg30081

There's a lot of difference between instinct and intuition. And a lot of people are afraid of intuition because it opens a whole lot of doors that they may prefer to have shut. Your wife is probably using her intuition.

This brings to mind Doormouse's post about where prey get their instincts turned off and no longer feel afraid of predators (instincts). I think intuition may be a much more complex process than this and the two are quite different. This makes intuition harder to study, imo.

I've observed that what most people call "intuition" is actually "wishful thinking". They will refer to being guided by "intuition" when, in fact, they are just justifying what they want to do anyway.

Instinct is certainly a more primitive "reading instrument," but also more reliable. Quite often our instinct is screaming "danger" at us when we interact with certain people, but we override this with something we call "intuition."

And that is not to say that TRUE intuition IS instinct.

I had never actually given this much thought until the C's said some curious things about it:

Q: (L) Are any books of the New Testament written by who they
claim to be written by?
A: No. Remember this is 70% propaganda.
Q: (L) Is 30% then the truth or the actual teachings?
A: Close. Enough you must decipher from instinct through
meditation.

Q: (D) Is there something we can do to help other people?
A: Access instincts, network.

A: All these procedures are factored by your own natural
healing abilities, this is of the light, and comes from
within when you follow your natural instincts and trust!

Q: (L) Is there some other measuring stick that we can use to
determine whether teachings are correct or incorrect?
A: Wisdom by way of instincts; all there is is lessons.
Q: (SV) I was thinking about that earlier today. If you are
under attack, how do you know if your instincts are
correct? (L) Are instincts different from emotions?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) How can you tell the difference between instinctive
knowledge and emotional reactions?
A: Emotions involve wishful thinking, instincts are "gut
feelings," psychic in nature, and are stronger. When it
is wishful thinking, there is always psychic instinct
seeping through which you can access if you use reason and
examine your lessons of the past.
Q: (L) Well, for example, the lady at the MUFON meeting on
Saturday, her response to Terry's comments on channeled
material as being STS, was that we were focusing on the
darkness, or negativity, and that people who focus on
darkness or negativity experience same. Could you comment
on this please?
A: What do your instincts tell you?
Q: (L) My instincts tell me that she is wanting to believe so
strongly and emotionally, that the aliens who have been
abducting her are good guys, and that somehow she is so
laden with an internal guilt complex that she believes
that she deserves that kind of treatment, and that
anything that is to the contrary, she rejects as wrong and
evil.
A: Okay.
Q: (L) And, futhermore, it occurred to me that a person who
really focuses on the darkness with the intention of
participation is someone who moves away from the light and
goes into the darkness, whereas someone who focuses on the
darkness with the intention of diminishing it, keeps the
light close to their back, and uses it to energize their
own light so that they can illuminate the darkness. Is
that correct?
A: Okay.
Q: (L) And, that someone who only looks at light, has their
back turned to the darkness, not only are they blinded by
the light, but they are also casting a shadow behind them.
A: "The Emperor is wearing new clothes."

There are other remarks about instincts, but then we get into a long bunch of context and background.

In any event, notice that the suggestion is made that awareness of instincts can be strengthened if one uses reason and examination of lessons of the past...

I think this is what Dabrowski is getting at when he talks about higher level instincts becoming integrated with personality. True intuition IS instinct IS 'non-sensory prehension', i.e. it's psychic in nature, like the Cs say, and I think Guardian's story is a good example. But lower instincts, as Ana mentioned, are about self-preservation (Dabrowski gives sexual instinct and fighting instinct as two examples). They're biological/behavioral programs, and in a primarily integrated person, they're totally mechanical. There's no 'inner separation' between the 'instinct' or urge and the behavior. Then there's a disintegrative process, where separation occurs. One may question the urge, not act on it, observe it. At higher levels, instinct seems to be a kind of 'inner knowing', and it again becomes unified with behavior. One Sees the true dynamics of the situation and acts accordingly (he or she cannot do otherwise, according to Gurdjieff). The difference is that it is a completely conscious process. There is an aware and knowing participant acting in unison with 'instinct'.

 

[Buddy]

An example of 'intuition' in a work context from the realm of computer networking:

My wife and I had moved to Virginia Beach, VA for a year or two. Networking the local business community, I met a guy who was consulting for Oracle. He asked me to take a look at a "problem". At the time, I had no experience in corporate settings and I declined, but was persuaded anyhow as he was convinced it was just an inside problem - possibly in a server or software subsystem that was doing post-processing work on incoming internet data.

Anyway, I guess I reached a point where I had looked at enough because after about 30 minutes, I was convinced the problem wasn't in-house. The raw data was somehow bogus, though I had no idea how I knew.

I was sufficiently certain that before I intended to go into reductionist mode, examining anything in-depth, I asked and was informed that internet came in via antennae on the roof. I sort of insisted this guy take me up and show me the dish and when we arrived, we discovered that something or someone had somehow stripped some insulation off a wire bundle leading into the building. We didn't bring any reading instruments, but I was equally certain that high-frequency signals were leaking all over the place. Replacing the wiring all the way to the nearest junction box solved the problem.

Before that experience, I had no idea how wireless networking worked and no experience with any because I had limited myself to wired home networks and was still new at it and teaching myself.

A similar kind of sensitivity to impression seems to exist with other engineers in other occupations. An architect friend once told me that the location of the ability was referred to by some as 'The Bayesian Center' in the brain (affectionately named after Rev. Bayes of course). He said he knows how to tell when another architect has it because when the boss says to use 'design patterns' on a particular project, the architect knows to take the entire environment (including the angle of sunrise and sunset) into consideration when designing the building - NOT to add a bunch of triangles and squares to the structure! :D

 

[obyvatel]

True intuition IS instinct IS 'non-sensory prehension',

I do not understand why intuition has to be non-sensory. Sensory perception is a channel which provides data about environment which may not be readily accessible for intellectual analysis. If intuition is a synthesizing mental function integrating various channels of information, then sensory perception could be included in its components - or so it seems. It would seem that a doctor making an intuitive diagnosis would use the sensory information in addition to using other instruments of perception including "higher" ones. It may not be the most important component of intuition in some cases but is there a specific reason for excluding it?

 

[Buddy]

A. I. can correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that the phrase 'non-sensory prehension' is meant relative to the commonly understood or more familiar senses. My personal view is that every cell and aspect of our being is sensory in some context - receivers and transmitters.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

A. I. can correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression is that the phrase 'non-sensory prehension' is meant relative to the commonly understood or more familiar senses. My personal view is that every cell and aspect of our being is sensory in some context - receivers and transmitters.

Yeah, that's Whitehead's term and I think your impression matches with his. "Sensory" refers to commonly understood senses. However, he goes further than just saying that cells "sense" things in terms of transmitting and receiving data, like mechanical billiard balls. He is saying that experience, or awareness, goes right down to the atomic level. Every part of creation 'experiences' or 'prehends' existence of itself and the world, and our consciousness is just a higher degree of that awareness. According to Whitehead (from what I can tell), telepathy, 'action at a distance', and even superluminal effects are fundamental to consciousness. The are rooted in 'sympathy', which is the root of 'knowing' anything. In answer to obyvatel's question, I don't think that intuition HAS to be non-sensory, just that it IS by its very nature. Intuition makes use of sensory data, but the intuition itself is a non-sensory function, related to non-sensory 'sympathy' and direct knowing. Maybe the sensory data is like a key that unlocks the door to direct knowing, and why intuition 'feels' different than just thinking and concluding?

 

[Buddy]

He is saying that experience, or awareness, goes right down to the atomic level. Every part of creation 'experiences' or 'prehends' existence of itself and the world, and our consciousness is just a higher degree of that awareness. According to Whitehead (from what I can tell), telepathy, 'action at a distance', and even superluminal effects are fundamental to consciousness.

But of course. Why would consciousness be a dis-continuous thing? As Guardian already alluded to (but in different terms), it is only the false boundary 'tween self and 'rest of universe' that makes it appear otherwise.

Yay! I matched impressions with somebody! :D

 

[Guardian]

Yeah, that's Whitehead's term and I think your impression matches with his. "Sensory" refers to commonly understood senses. However, he goes further than just saying that cells "sense" things in terms of transmitting and receiving data, like mechanical billiard balls. He is saying that experience, or awareness, goes right down to the atomic level. Every part of creation 'experiences' or 'prehends' existence of itself and the world, and our consciousness is just a higher degree of that awareness. According to Whitehead (from what I can tell), telepathy, 'action at a distance', and even superluminal effects are fundamental to consciousness. The are rooted in 'sympathy', which is the root of 'knowing' anything.

This matches my experiences to a T! What I consider my intuition almost always kicks in when someone or thing is in distress of some kind, in fact, I'm trying to think of a time when it manifested and a trauma of some kind wasn't involved...and I can't.

 

[axj]

This matches my experiences to a T! What I consider my intuition almost always kicks in when someone or thing is in distress of some kind, in fact, I'm trying to think of a time when it manifested and a trauma of some kind wasn't involved...and I can't.

From my experience, intuition is not limited to times of trauma or distress. This sounds more like the physical body's instinct, if it gets activated only in times of trauma, danger, and so on.

 

[obyvatel]

This matches my experiences to a T! What I consider my intuition almost always kicks in when someone or thing is in distress of some kind, in fact, I'm trying to think of a time when it manifested and a trauma of some kind wasn't involved...and I can't.

From my experience, intuition is not limited to times of trauma or distress. This sounds more like the physical body's instinct, if it gets activated only in times of trauma, danger, and so on.

Since we are "wave-reading consciousness units" immersed in a vast ocean of waves of different frequencies (or some more appropriate attribute that would characterize such waves), we are theoretically connected to much more inputs than we can process. Our receivers are tuned to a small subset of the signals that pass through us. As our being grows, our receiver becomes more "wideband", able to properly receive and decode a wider set of waves/frequencies.

Since Guardian's predominant role in this incarnation has been that of a rescuer, her receiving apparatus is likely attuned to the "trauma frequency" - so she could be more sensitive to such inputs. It is not merely instincts of the physical body - a very strong element of empathy is involved. In the crow example that she gave, there was no element of danger involved either for her or for anyone close to her - which if present I believe would likely lead to a triggering of the physical body's instinct related to distress and survival.

 

[Harold]

I notice with intuition it is a initial gut feeling that is quickly covered up by programs. If one can remember this initial thought or feeling and then compare it to the outcome, this can be helpful. It can show what kind of programs are running used to cover up your intuition.

Sometimes though, the initial gut feeling will never leave it is so strong.

As for self remembering in general. I have been approaching it with remembering to change my mechanical movements and thoughts. I remember to walk different. I remember to listen to my tone of voice and alter it. I remember to smile etc. I remember that I don't really know what is going on etc. This applies to thoughts etc.

Is this a good start at self remembering? I often wonder if it is all one can do to remember and not much more. I also notice that when doing this style of self remembering, there is little room for programs and mechanicalness.

Self remembering is listening to your conscience too? I think so.

 

[go2]

This matches my experiences to a T! What I consider my intuition almost always kicks in when someone or thing is in distress of some kind, in fact, I'm trying to think of a time when it manifested and a trauma of some kind wasn't involved...and I can't.

From my experience, intuition is not limited to times of trauma or distress. This sounds more like the physical body's instinct, if it gets activated only in times of trauma, danger, and so on.

Since we are "wave-reading consciousness units" immersed in a vast ocean of waves of different frequencies (or some more appropriate attribute that would characterize such waves), we are theoretically connected to much more inputs than we can process. Our receivers are tuned to a small subset of the signals that pass through us. As our being grows, our receiver becomes more "wideband", able to properly receive and decode a wider set of waves/frequencies.

Since Guardian's predominant role in this incarnation has been that of a rescuer, her receiving apparatus is likely attuned to the "trauma frequency" - so she could be more sensitive to such inputs. It is not merely instincts of the physical body - a very strong element of empathy is involved. In the crow example that she gave, there was no element of danger involved either for her or for anyone close to her - which if present I believe would likely lead to a triggering of the physical body's instinct related to distress and survival.

FWIW-The instinctive-motor center analyzes the incoming sensory data for survival functions, including predators, mates, or food.

The feeling center maps the bodies internal states and mirror neuron circuits feel the internal states of another being by mapping as if it were our own bodies internal state. It is the center of relationship and the source of empathy, compassion, etc. and our mammelian heritage.

The thinking center receives data from the feeling center and the instinctive-motor center in a feedback loop. The thinking center analyzes pattern and form of the incoming data and applies reasoning and association from memory to modulate some instinctive-motor and feeling functions, provided there is time for the slow speed of the thinking center.

These functions are entirely mechanical in the normal man or woman, until self-remembering and self-observation establish control over the mechanical reactions of the machine. Human behavior is almost entirely mechanically programmed by DNA and culture. Instincts are entirely mechanical, empathy is entirely mechanical, and most thinking is programmed by culture and is entirely mechanical. Where is the conscious man or woman?

 

[Buddy]

This matches my experiences to a T! What I consider my intuition almost always kicks in when someone or thing is in distress of some kind, in fact, I'm trying to think of a time when it manifested and a trauma of some kind wasn't involved...and I can't.

From my experience, intuition is not limited to times of trauma or distress. This sounds more like the physical body's instinct, if it gets activated only in times of trauma, danger, and so on.

Since we are "wave-reading consciousness units" immersed in a vast ocean of waves of different frequencies (or some more appropriate attribute that would characterize such waves), we are theoretically connected to much more inputs than we can process. Our receivers are tuned to a small subset of the signals that pass through us. As our being grows, our receiver becomes more "wideband", able to properly receive and decode a wider set of waves/frequencies.

Since Guardian's predominant role in this incarnation has been that of a rescuer, her receiving apparatus is likely attuned to the "trauma frequency" - so she could be more sensitive to such inputs. It is not merely instincts of the physical body - a very strong element of empathy is involved. In the crow example that she gave, there was no element of danger involved either for her or for anyone close to her - which if present I believe would likely lead to a triggering of the physical body's instinct related to distress and survival.

FWIW-The instinctive-motor center analyzes the incoming sensory data for survival functions, including predators, mates, or food.

The feeling center maps the bodies internal states and mirror neuron circuits feel the internal states of another being by mapping as if it were our own bodies internal state. It is the center of relationship and the source of empathy, compassion, etc. and our mammelian heritage.

The thinking center receives data from the feeling center and the instinctive-motor center in a feedback loop. The thinking center analyzes pattern and form of the incoming data and applies reasoning and association from memory to modulate some instinctive-motor and feeling functions, provided there is time for the slow speed of the thinking center.

These functions are entirely mechanical in the normal man or woman, until self-remembering and self-observation establish control over the mechanical reactions of the machine. Human behavior is almost entirely mechanically programmed by DNA and culture. Instincts are entirely mechanical, empathy is entirely mechanical, and most thinking is programmed by culture and is entirely mechanical. Where is the conscious man or woman?

To me, consciousness is not a 'thing'. It's more like a resonance effect. If that is the case, then he or she would be the "knowingness" between the lines of everything that has been said in the above quote.

Approaching this goal from esoteric Work, at first people have to make a lot of effort (intentional suffering) to break themselves out of their habitual ruts, without any perceived change in their own consciousness. Simultaneously, they work on their body/brain chemistry - using this adjustment like a 'gain control' until the 'setting' is just right.

At the appropriate time, all of a sudden, their humor, awareness of their situation, awareness of their own bodies, their sensuality, energy and awareness of their own options all explode, and they experience a sudden change in their state of mind. There is no automatism to be seen anywhere. You feel as if the next moment you are as likely to start building a rocket ship to the moon as you are to debate the merits of mowing the grass. That is, until internal considering takes over and one starts imagining derisory comments and contempt behavior coming from others and directed to oneself for one's new-found "madness".

BTW, this is not a linear effect. It's more like a switch turning on. If we understand this, in neurochemical terms, as their dopamine levels dropping to the point where the feedback loop is exactly adjusted, then we can understand why this deeper awareness turns on and off like a switch instead of being a gradual effect. In the terms in which I occasionally describe it, when people get coerced and trapped in robotic behavior, after they have lost their full awareness, they can be seen gradually sinking deeper and deeper into self-absorption, complacency and inability to even notice an emergency in their vicinity.

Once the full consciousness that a person is capable of (which is the natural right of man before 'wrong' conditions were put into him (G)) has turned off like a switch, people can reach different levels of introspective boredom addiction, with people like junior bureaucratic clerical workers being chronically unaware, and some shop workers and others with an objective reality fixation who enjoy more stimulation, being more aware of their immediate physical surroundings and better able to pay attention to reality right and left.

Some may disagree with something in the above, and that's ok. Some things and states have to be experienced to be believed and I'm not talking about those fake reality highs. It is painful to be aware in this world that is dominated by true madness. You may not even want it. On the other hand, a person loses a great deal more while in the addicted and robotic state than he gains from his self calming, stereotypical behaviors, as I see it.

Just take it FWIW as I cannot convince anyone of anything.

 

[Paragon]

Yes bud the process you describe, it's just like a switch! It just turns on and you suddenly feel like you could literally do anything. I feel like I'm aware of all the variables in a situation without having to think about it, as it just all happens in real time. I get the feeling life is meant to be lived this way but it's quite hard to stay in that state of mind, especially if I identify with a stray negative thought which then proceeds to take over my awareness - it eats it up!. And I find that you just fall deeper into your negative introject when you identify with it, and it begins to get harder to 'switch on' again so sometimes I just laugh it off and that can help.

It affects me physically more than any other area because I could be walking about confidently in my shop, then a negative thought pops into my head and tells me that I walk funny which makes me self conscious and I begin to act all goofy, 'switching off' and leads me to internally consider.

 

[Buddy]

Yes bud the process you describe, it's just like a switch! It just turns on and you suddenly feel like you could literally do anything. I feel like I'm aware of all the variables in a situation without having to think about it, as it just all happens in real time. I get the feeling life is meant to be lived this way but it's quite hard to stay in that state of mind, especially if I identify with a stray negative thought which then proceeds to take over my awareness - it eats it up!. And I find that you just fall deeper into your negative introject when you identify with it, and it begins to get harder to 'switch on' again so sometimes I just laugh it off and that can help.

It affects me physically more than any other area because I could be walking about confidently in my shop, then a negative thought pops into my head and tells me that I walk funny which makes me self conscious and I begin to act all goofy, 'switching off' and leads me to internally consider.

Thank you for adding this to the discussion. :)